Withdrawal of some Premium and CS services
-
Starting next Monday, Premium 537 & 540 will be withdrawn.
At the same time, City Shopper 551, 575, 577 & 580 will be withdrawn too.
Service 816 (CT28) will be converted to a festive season service from that day too.
These withdrawals and conversion are supposedly due to low demand.
Guys...what do you think? Air your views here
-
580 ok. I always see nobody one. The rest i dunno cuz i dun see them.
-
i do think that for service 580, it should be withdrawn as it has less people taking that bus. but for CT28's conversion, it is a little inconvinient as people from clementi who want to go to Chinatown will have to take another the bus like 166 and 147.
-
With some cityshopper services withdrawn, there will be extra buses and they can be given to the "crying" services which will help other services. But I must say that SBST has introduced the Premium and Cityshopper Services as an effort to discourage people from driving while SMRT did nothing about their crying services like 980 and kept focusing on its trains.
-
Originally posted by SBS2695H:
With some cityshopper services withdrawn, there will be extra buses and they can be given to the "crying" services which will help other services. But I must say that SBST has introduced the Premium and Cityshopper Services as an effort to discourage people from driving while SMRT did nothing about their crying services like 980 and kept focusing on its trains.
Nah, they just go back to parent svs -
Originally posted by sbst275:
Nah, they just go back to parent svs
Why is it neccecary bringing them back to their parent services when there are other services that needs the extra buses more? However for 551 the extra buses can be given to 27 as 27 needs those buses. But for 575 the extra buses can be anytime given to Service 36 which needs it more than its parent Service 9. -
Originally posted by SBS2695H:
Why is it neccecary bringing them back to their parent services when there are other services that needs the extra buses more? However for 551 the extra buses can be given to 27 as 27 needs those buses. But for 575 the extra buses can be anytime given to Service 36 which needs it more than its parent Service 9.Then those buses would be off from S shift and you would be lagi longer queue for Sv 27
-
Originally posted by SBS2695H:
Why is it neccecary bringing them back to their parent services when there are other services that needs the extra buses more? However for 551 the extra buses can be given to 27 as 27 needs those buses. But for 575 the extra buses can be anytime given to Service 36 which needs it more than its parent Service 9.
Once upon a time the 3 buses from 575 came from Service 9. Since they are withdrawn they should go back to service 9. End of Story -
maybe they can switch to making 551,575,577 operational on wkends onli? except 580 la. which i oways see it pass by orchard w/o any pax onboard. wonder if those living in e above areas will feedback to sbst nt. pity those hu reli nid these svcs.
thankful 581 still ard.
-
Originally posted by SBS2695H:
Why is it neccecary bringing them back to their parent services when there are other services that needs the extra buses more? However for 551 the extra buses can be given to 27 as 27 needs those buses. But for 575 the extra buses can be anytime given to Service 36 which needs it more than its parent Service 9.
Consider the demand for svc9 also please. -
Originally posted by Simple_boi:
Consider the demand for svc9 also please.
Since 575 has 3 buses, maybe 1 give to 9 and 2 give to 36? -
Perhaps 551, 577 and CT28 should be converted into weekend service instead.
-
Originally posted by SBS2695H:
Since 575 has 3 buses, maybe 1 give to 9 and 2 give to 36?
You just never listen to what i said earlier. Once upon a time the 3 S575 buses belong to S9. They operated as 2 split shifts & 1 full day. Then they went over to S575 with 2 doing T shift and 1 on full day. There was a net reduction of 1 bus during PM peak as 1 of the S575 buses does not do S9 during PM peak. However it was able to cope with the loading. Now, when S575 is withdrawn, all 3 buses should go back to S9. You simply underestimate how crowded S9 can get during AM Peak. -
Originally posted by service_238:
You just never listen to what i said earlier. Once upon a time the 3 S575 buses belong to S9. They operated as 2 split shifts & 1 full day. Then they went over to S575 with 2 doing T shift and 1 on full day. There was a net reduction of 1 bus during PM peak as 1 of the S575 buses does not do S9 during PM peak. However it was able to cope with the loading. Now, when S575 is withdrawn, all 3 buses should go back to S9. You simply underestimate how crowded S9 can get during AM Peak.
I know exactly the demand since i frequent passenger at simei. haha. -
they should go back the parent services since that's where they came from.
dont act smart want redeploy here there please. -
Ya, CS svcs got its parent svc... so, they will go back there
-
Have anyone thought of another possible reason for withdrawal is the shortage of BCs other than very low demand?
-
Originally posted by SBS2695H:
Have anyone thought of another possible reason for withdrawal is the shortage of BCs other than very low demand?
nope. -
Originally posted by -beehoon:
maybe they can switch to making 551,575,577 operational on wkends onli? except 580 la. which i oways see it pass by orchard w/o any pax onboard. wonder if those living in e above areas will feedback to sbst nt. pity those hu reli nid these svcs.
thankful 581 still ard.
can put to a Suntec Fair Day service
-
Originally posted by service_238:
You just never listen to what i said earlier. Once upon a time the 3 S575 buses belong to S9. They operated as 2 split shifts & 1 full day. Then they went over to S575 with 2 doing T shift and 1 on full day. There was a net reduction of 1 bus during PM peak as 1 of the S575 buses does not do S9 during PM peak. However it was able to cope with the loading. Now, when S575 is withdrawn, all 3 buses should go back to S9. You simply underestimate how crowded S9 can get during AM Peak.then should put the parent service to 196
196 can cope peaks espicially the 196e can cope for the normal 196.
-
Anyone knows why 579 change parent svc huh?
-
Originally posted by SBS8033D:
Anyone knows why 579 change parent svc huh?
Supplementary service rationalisation. Let me give you a timeline.Before Dec 07, 8 and 28 does not have any xover. 37 has xover from 38 and 293.
On 3 Dec 07, 37 add split shift while 293 reduce split shift. At the same time 293 xovers are gone, retaining the 38 xovers. From the micro view this solves the 293 buses from doing 37 for most of the duty to doing 37 as split shift.
In the planning of 579, I believe the staff didnt take into consideration of the demand patterns of 37 as well as the operating hours of 579. If not if they change it the driver allocation would be somewhat messy as the new S37 split shift drivers would learn 579. Hence when 579 was introduced on 15 Dec 07, the supplementary trips went to S8 and S28 instead.
As time evolved, to make things neater for Tampines Route Group as well as the supplementary trips and drivers, it would be better to allocate all the supplementary trips for 579 to one service instead of 2 services if resources are justified.
Hence on 26 May 08, they add 1 split shift each for S8 and S28, replacing 2 supplementary buses each. There's an overall deduction of buses (and of course drivers) of S37 (3 buses), 8/28 (1 bus each) and 38 (1 bus). To top it off, S38 had its supplementary trips removed and fleet size cut. S37's original 2 buses can be converted into DD to solve the demand crunch during peak as well as off peak hours.
1 stone kill many birds.. where to find?
-
Originally posted by SBS8033D:
then should put the parent service to 196
196 can cope peaks espicially the 196e can cope for the normal 196.
S196 added 1 S shift DD recently what else you want? -
Svc 28 didnt get fleet reduction. Just tat during off peak hrs (esp at nite) 2 DDs become 2 SDs.
-
Lucky service 578 not affected though
The only fast and direct link from Fernvale to Orchard/Suntec.